Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 34 / Wednesday, February 21, 2007 / Notices 7861 

for Atlantic tunas, swordfish, billfish, 

and sharks. 

NMFS published a notice of intent to 

prepare an environmental impact 

statement and potentially amend HMS 

EFH regulations on November 7, 2006 

(71 FR 65087). NMFS will hold a 

scoping meeting during the March 13–

15 AP meeting to discuss options for 

updating EFH. 

Special Accommodations 

This meeting is physically accessible 

to people with disabilities. Requests for 

sign language interpretation or other 

auxiliary aids should be directed to 

Carol Douglas at (301) 713–2347, at least 

7 days prior to the meeting. 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq. and 1801 

et seq. 

Dated: February 13, 2007. 

James P. Burgess, 

Acting Director, Office of Sustainable 

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. E7–2892 Filed 2–20–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–S 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Office of Elementary and Secondary 

Education; Overview Information; 

Early Childhood Educator Professional 

Development (ECEPD) Program; 

Notice Inviting Applications for New 

Awards for Fiscal Year (FY) 2007 

Catalog of Federal Domestic 

Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.349A. 

Dates: 

Applications Available: February 20, 

2007. 

Deadline for Transmittal of 

Applications: April 20, 2007. 

Deadline for Intergovernmental 

Review: June 19, 2007. 

Eligible Applicants: A partnership 

that has not previously received an 

ECEPD grant and that consists of at least 

one entity from each of the following 

categories: 

(i) One or more institutions of higher 

education (IHEs), or other public or 

private entities (including faith-based 

organizations), that provide professional 

development for early childhood 

educators who work with children from 

low-income families in high-need 

communities. 

(ii) One or more public agencies 

(including local educational agencies 

(LEAs), State educational agencies 

(SEAs), State human services agencies, 

and State and local agencies 

administering programs under the Child 

Care and Development Block Grant Act 

of 1990), Head Start agencies, or private 

organizations (including faith-based 

organizations). 

(iii) If feasible, an entity with 

demonstrated experience in providing 

training to educators in early childhood 

education programs concerning 

identifying and preventing behavior 

problems or working with children 

identified as or suspected to be victims 

of abuse. This entity may be one of the 

partners described in paragraphs (i) and 

(ii) under Eligible Applicants. 

A partnership may apply for these 

funds only if one of the partners 

currently provides professional 

development for early childhood 

educators working in programs located 

in high-need communities with children 

from low-income families. 

Estimated Available Funds: The 

Administration has requested 

$14,549,000 for the ECEPD program for 

FY 2007, of which we anticipate 

$14,330,765 would be available for 

these grants. For FY 2007, 

approximately 1 percent of the ECEPD 

appropriation would be set aside to 

administer the grant award competition, 

and 0.5 percent would be set aside for 

evaluation activities authorized under 

section 9601 (Evaluations) of the ESEA 

as amended by NCLB, 20 U.S.C. 7941(a). 

The actual level of funding, if any, 

depends on final congressional action. 

However, we are inviting applications to 

allow enough time to complete the grant 

process if Congress appropriates funds 

for this program. 

Estimated Range of Awards: 

$2,400,000–$4,800,000. 

Estimated Average Size of Awards: 

$3,600,000. 

Estimated Number of Awards: 3–6 

awards. 

Note: The Department is not bound by any 

estimates in this notice. 

Project Period: Up to 36 months. 

Full Text of Announcement 

I. Funding Opportunity Description 

Purpose of Program: The purpose of 

the ECEPD program is to enhance the 

school readiness of young children, 

particularly disadvantaged young 

children, and to prevent them from 

encountering difficulties once they enter 

school, by improving the knowledge 

and skills of early childhood educators 

who work in communities that have 

high concentrations of children living in 

poverty. 

Projects funded under the ECEPD 

program provide high-quality, 

sustained, and intensive professional 

development for these early childhood 

educators in how to provide 

developmentally appropriate schoolreadiness services for preschool-age 

children that are based on the best 

available research on early childhood 

pedagogy and on child development 

and learning. For these grants, the 

Department is increasing the emphasis 

on the quality of program evaluations. 

The specific activities for which 

recipients may use grant funds are 

identified in the application package. 

Priorities: 

This competition includes one 

absolute priority, and, within that 

priority, one competitive preference 

priority and three invitational priorities 

as follows. 

In accordance with 34 CFR 

75.105(b)(2)(iv), this priority is from 

section 2151(e)(5)(A) of the Elementary 

and Secondary Education Act of 1965, 

as amended (ESEA), 20 U.S.C. 

6651(e)(5)(A). 

Absolute Priority: For FY 2007 this 

priority is an absolute priority. Under 34 

CFR 75.105(c)(3) we consider only 

applications that meet this priority. 

This priority is: 

High-Need Communities. 

The applicant partnership, if awarded 

a grant, shall use the grant funds to 

carry out activities that will improve the 

knowledge and skills of early childhood 

educators who are working in early 

childhood programs that are located in 

high-need communities. 

An eligible applicant must 

demonstrate in its application how it 

meets the statutory requirement in 

section 2151(e)(5)(A) of the ESEA by 

including relevant demographic and 

socioeconomic data about the high-need 

community in which each program is 

located, as indicated in the application 

package. (See section 2151(e)(3)(B)(i) of 

the ESEA.) 

High-need community, as defined in 

section 2151(e)(9)(B) of the ESEA, 

means—

(a) A political subdivision of a State, 

or a portion of a political subdivision of 

a State, in which at least 50 percent of 

the children are from low-income 

families; or 

(b) A political subdivision of a State 

that is among the 10 percent of political 

subdivisions of the State having the 

greatest numbers of such children. 

Note: The following additional terms used 

in or related to this absolute priority have 

statutory definitions that are included in the 

application package: Early childhood 

educator and low-income family. 

Competitive Preference Priority: 

Within this absolute priority, we give 

competitive preference to applications 

that address the following priority. 

This priority is from the notice of 

final priority for Scientifically Based 

Evaluation Methods, published in the 

Federal Register on January 25, 2005 

(70 FR 3586), available at: http:// 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES
7862 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 34 / Wednesday, February 21, 2007 / Notices 

www.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/ 

finrule/2005–1/012505a.html. 

Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i), we 

award up to an additional 20 points to 

an application, depending on how well 

the application meets this priority. 

When using the priority to give 

competitive preference to an 

application, the Secretary will review 

applications using a two-stage process. 

In the first stage, the application will be 

reviewed without taking the priority 

into account. In the second stage of 

review, the applications rated highest in 

stage one will be reviewed for 

competitive preference. We consider 

awarding additional (competitive 

preference) points only to those 

applicants with top-ranked scores on 

the selection criteria. 

This priority is: 

Scientifically Based Evaluation 

Methods. 

The Secretary establishes a priority 

for projects proposing an evaluation 

plan that is based on rigorous 

scientifically based research methods to 

assess the effectiveness of a particular 

intervention, as described in the 

following paragraphs. The Secretary 

intends that this priority will allow 

program participants and the 

Department to determine whether the 

project produces meaningful effects on 

student achievement or teacher 

performance. 

Evaluation methods using an 

experimental design are best for 

determining project effectiveness. Thus, 

when feasible, the project must use an 

experimental design under which 

participants (e.g., students, teachers, 

classrooms, or schools) are randomly 

assigned to participate in the project 

activities being evaluated or to a control 

group that does not participate in the 

project activities being evaluated. 

If random assignment is not feasible, 

the project may use a quasiexperimental design with carefully 

matched comparison conditions. This 

alternative design attempts to 

approximate a randomly assigned 

control group by matching participants 

(e.g., students, teachers, classrooms, or 

schools) with non-participants having 

similar pre-program characteristics. 

In cases where random assignment is 

not possible and participation in the 

intervention is determined by a 

specified cutting point on a quantified 

continuum of scores, regression 

discontinuity designs may be employed. 

For projects that are focused on 

special populations in which sufficient 

numbers of participants are not 

available to support random assignment 

or matched comparison group designs, 

single-subject designs such as multiple 

baseline or treatment-reversal or 

interrupted time series that are capable 

of demonstrating causal relationships 

can be employed. 

Proposed evaluation strategies that 

use neither experimental designs with 

random assignment nor quasiexperimental designs using a matched 

comparison group nor regression 

discontinuity designs will not be 

considered responsive to the priority 

when sufficient numbers of participants 

are available to support these designs. 

Evaluation strategies that involve too 

small a number of participants to 

support group designs must be capable 

of demonstrating the causal effects of an 

intervention or program on those 

participants. 

The proposed evaluation plan must 

describe how the project evaluator will 

collect—before the project intervention 

commences and after it ends—valid and 

reliable data that measure the impact of 

participation in the program or in the 

comparison group. 

If the priority is used as a competitive 

preference priority, points awarded 

under this priority will be determined 

by the quality of the proposed 

evaluation method. In determining the 

quality of the evaluation method, we 

will consider the extent to which the 

applicant presents a feasible, credible 

plan that includes the following: 

(1) The type of design to be used (e.g., 

random assignment or matched 

comparison). If matched comparison, 

include in the plan a discussion of why 

random assignment is not feasible. 

(2) Outcomes to be measured. 

(3) A discussion of how the applicant 

plans to assign students, teachers, 

classrooms, or schools to the project and 

control group or match them for 

comparison with other students, 

teachers, classrooms, or schools. 

(4) A proposed evaluator, preferably 

independent, with the necessary 

background and technical expertise to 

carry out the proposed evaluation. An 

independent evaluator does not have 

any authority over the project and is not 

involved in its implementation. 

In general, depending on the 

implemented program or project, under 

a competitive preference priority, 

random assignment evaluation methods 

will receive more points than matched 

comparison evaluation methods. 

Definitions 

As used in this notice—

Scientifically based research (section 

9101(37) of the ESEA as amended by the 

No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 

(NCLB), 20 U.S.C. 7801(37)): 

(A) Means research that involves the 

application of rigorous, systematic, and 

objective procedures to obtain reliable 

and valid knowledge relevant to 

education activities and programs; and 

(B) Includes research that—

(i) Employs systematic, empirical 

methods that draw on observation or 

experiment; 

(ii) Involves rigorous data analyses 

that are adequate to test the stated 

hypotheses and justify the general 

conclusions drawn; 

(iii) Relies on measurements or 

observational methods that provide 

reliable and valid data across evaluators 

and observers, across multiple 

measurements and observations, and 

across studies by the same or different 

investigators; 

(iv) Is evaluated using experimental or 

quasi-experimental designs in which 

individuals, entities, programs, or 

activities are assigned to different 

conditions and with appropriate 

controls to evaluate the effects of the 

condition of interest, with a preference 

for random-assignment experiments, or 

other designs to the extent that those 

designs contain within-condition or 

across-condition controls; 

(v) Ensures that experimental studies 

are presented in sufficient detail and 

clarity to allow for replication or, at a 

minimum, offer the opportunity to build 

systematically on their findings; and 

(vi) Has been accepted by a peerreviewed journal or approved by a panel 

of independent experts through a 

comparably rigorous, objective, and 

scientific review. 

Random assignment or experimental 

design means random assignment of 

students, teachers, classrooms, or 

schools to participate in a project being 

evaluated (treatment group) or not 

participate in the project (control 

group). The effect of the project is the 

difference in outcomes between the 

treatment and control groups. 

Quasi-experimental designs include 

several designs that attempt to 

approximate a random assignment 

design. 

Carefully matched comparison groups 

design means a quasi-experimental 

design in which project participants are 

matched with non-participants based on 

key characteristics that are thought to be 

related to the outcome. 

Regression discontinuity design 

means a quasi-experimental design that 

closely approximates an experimental 

design. In a regression discontinuity 

design, participants are assigned to a 

treatment or control group based on a 

numerical rating or score of a variable 

unrelated to the treatment such as the 

rating of an application for funding. 

Eligible students, teachers, classrooms, 

or schools above a certain score (‘‘cut 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 34 / Wednesday, February 21, 2007 / Notices 7863 

score’’) are assigned to the treatment 

group and those below the score are 

assigned to the control group. In the 

case of the scores of applicants’

proposals for funding, the ‘‘cut score’’ is 

established at the point where the 

program funds available are exhausted. 

Single subject design means a design 

that relies on the comparison of 

treatment effects on a single subject or 

group of single subjects. There is little 

confidence that findings based on this 

design would be the same for other 

members of the population. 

Treatment reversal design means a 

single subject design in which a pretreatment or baseline outcome 

measurement is compared with a posttreatment measure. Treatment would 

then be stopped for a period of time, a 

second baseline measure of the outcome 

would be taken, followed by a second 

application of the treatment or a 

different treatment. For example, this 

design might be used to evaluate a 

behavior modification program for 

disabled students with behavior 

disorders. 

Multiple baseline design means a 

single subject design to address 

concerns about the effects of normal 

development, timing of the treatment, 

and amount of the treatment with 

treatment-reversal designs by using a 

varying time schedule for introduction 

of the treatment and/or treatments of 

different lengths or intensity. 

Interrupted time series design means 

a quasi-experimental design in which 

the outcome of interest is measured 

multiple times before and after the 

treatment for program participants only. 

Invitational Priorities: Within the 

absolute priority, we are particularly 

interested in applications that address 

the following invitational priorities. 

Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(1) we do not 

give an application that meets these 

invitational priorities a competitive or 

absolute preference over other 

applications. 

These priorities are: 

Invitational Priority 1—English 

Language Acquisition Plan 

For applicants serving children with 

limited English proficiency, the 

Secretary is especially interested in 

applications that include a specific plan 

for the development of English language 

acquisition for these children from the 

start of their preschool experience. The 

ECEPD program is designed to prepare 

children to enter kindergarten with the 

necessary cognitive, early language, and 

literacy skills for success in school. 

School success often is dependent on 

each child entering kindergarten being 

as proficient as possible in English so 

that the child is ready to benefit from 

formal reading instruction in English 

when the child starts school. 

The English language acquisition plan 

should, at a minimum: (1) Include a 

description of the approach for the 

development of language, based on the 

linguistic factors or skills that serve as 

the foundation for a strong language 

base, which is a necessary precursor for 

success in the development of preliteracy and literacy skills for children 

with limited English proficiency; (2) 

explain the acquisition strategies, based 

on best available valid and reliable 

research, that the applicant will use to 

address English language acquisition in 

a multi-lingual classroom; (3) describe 

how the project will facilitate the 

children’s transition to English 

proficiency by means such as the use of 

print-rich instructional activities in 

appropriate multiple languages, and 

hiring bilingual teachers, 

paraprofessionals, or translators to work 

in the preschool classroom; (4) include 

intensive professional development for 

instructors and paraprofessionals on the 

development of English language 

proficiency; and (5) include a timeline 

that describes benchmarks for the 

introduction of the development of 

English language proficiency and the 

use of measurement tools. 

Ideally, at least one instructional staff 

member in each ECEPD classroom 

should be dual-language proficient both 

in a child’s first language and in English 

to facilitate the child’s understanding of 

instruction and transition to English 

proficiency. At a minimum, each 

classroom should include a teacher who 

is proficient in English. 

Invitational Priority 2—Classroom 

Curricula and Teacher Professional 

Development 

The Secretary is especially interested 

in applications that focus the 

professional development provided 

through this project that will be 

provided for early childhood educators 

on specific curricula promoting young 

children’s school readiness in the areas 

of language and cognitive development 

and early reading and numeracy skills 

that are being used in those educators’

early childhood programs, and on the 

research base supporting that curricula. 

In addition to being based on 

scientifically based research, the 

curricula should have standardized 

training procedures and published 

curriculum materials to support 

implementation by the early childhood 

educators. The chosen curricula should 

include a scope and sequence of skills 

and content with concrete instructional 

goals that are designed to promote early 

language, reading, and numeracy skills. 

The need for rigorous preschool 

curricula is driven by the national focus 

on high-quality preschool experiences 

that prepare children for formal reading 

instruction in the elementary grades. 

The professional development in the 

ECEPD program provides opportunities 

for the program participants to achieve 

greater understanding of the 

implementation of scientifically based 

curricula that focus on early language, 

reading, and numeracy skills of young 

children. Grantees should focus on 

assisting the early childhood educators 

to implement fully the selected 

curricula and on measuring learning 

outcomes for the children taught by 

those educators. 

Invitational Priority 3—Applications 

That Include One or More Privately 

Funded Preschools as Participating 

Sites 

Under the third invitational priority, 

the Secretary is especially interested in 

applications that include, as a 

participating site (or sites), one or more 

privately funded preschools, such as a 

preschool operated by a faith-based 

organization, located in a high-need 

community that serves concentrations of 

children from low-income families. 

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 6651(e). 

Applicable Regulations: (a) The 

Education Department General 

Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 

34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82, 

84, 85, 86, 97, 98, and 99. 

(b) The notice of final priority for 

Scientifically Based Evaluation 

Methods, published in the Federal 

Register on January 25, 2005 (70 FR 

3586). 

Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 79 

apply to all applicants except federally 

recognized Indian tribes. 

Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 

apply to IHEs only. 

II. Award Information 

Type of Award: Discretionary grants. 

Estimated Available Funds: The 

Administration has requested 

$14,549,000 for the ECEPD program for 

FY 2007, of which we anticipate 

$14,330,765 would be available for 

these grants. For FY 2007, 

approximately 1 percent of the ECEPD 

appropriation would be set aside to 

administer the grant award competition 

and 0.5 percent would be set aside for 

evaluation activities authorized under 

section 9601 (Evaluations) of the ESEA 

as amended by NCLB, 20 U.S.C. 7941(a). 

The actual level of funding, if any, 

depends on final congressional action. 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES
7864 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 34 / Wednesday, February 21, 2007 / Notices 

However, we are inviting applications to 

allow enough time to complete the grant 

process if Congress appropriates funds 

for this program. 

Estimated Range of Awards: 

$2,400,000–$4,800,000. 

Estimated Average Size of Awards: 

$3,600,000. 

Estimated Number of Awards: 3–6 

awards. 

Note: The Department is not bound by any 

estimates in this notice. 

Project Period: Up to 36 months. 

III. Eligibility Information 

1. Eligible Applicants: A partnership 

that has not previously received an 

ECEPD grant and that consists of at least 

one entity from each of the following 

categories: 

(i) One or more IHEs, or other public 

or private entities (including faith-based 

organizations), that provide professional 

development for early childhood 

educators who work with children from 

low-income families in high-need 

communities. 

(ii) One or more public agencies 

(including LEAs, SEAs, State human 

services agencies, and State and local 

agencies administering programs under 

the Child Care and Development Block 

Grant Act of 1990), Head Start agencies, 

or private organizations (including faithbased organizations). 

(iii) If feasible, an entity with 

demonstrated experience in providing 

training to educators in early childhood 

education programs concerning 

identifying and preventing behavior 

problems or working with children 

identified as or suspected to be victims 

of abuse. This entity may be one of the 

partners described in paragraphs (i) and 

(ii) under Eligible Applicants. 

A partnership may apply for these 

funds only if one of the partners 

currently provides professional 

development for early childhood 

educators working in programs located 

in high-need communities with children 

from low-income families. 

2. Cost Sharing or Matching: Each 

partnership that receives a grant under 

this program must provide (1) at least 50 

percent of the total cost of the project for 

the entire grant period; and (2) at least 

20 percent of the project cost for each 

year. The project may provide these 

funds from any source, other than this 

program, including other Federal 

sources. The partnership may satisfy 

these cost-sharing requirements by 

providing contributions in cash or inkind, fairly evaluated, including plant, 

equipment, and services. Only 

allowable costs may be counted as part 

of the grantee’s share. For example, a 

grantee generally may not count toward 

its share the salary costs of teachers who 

are participating in the grant, except for 

(under certain circumstances) the 

portion of time that a teacher 

participates in direct professional 

development or administering 

assessments under the grant. In 

addition, any indirect costs over and 

above the allowable amount may not be 

counted toward a grantee’s share. For 

additional information about indirect 

costs, see section IV.5. Funding 

Restrictions of this notice. 

IV. Application and Submission 

Information 

1. Address To Request Application 

Package: You may obtain an application 

package via the Internet or from the 

Education Publications Center (ED 

Pubs). To obtain an application via the 

Internet, use the following Internet 

address: http://www.ed.gov/programs/ 

eceducator/index.html. 

To obtain a copy from ED Pubs, write 

or call the following: Education 

Publications Center, P.O. Box 1398, 

Jessup, MD 20794–1398. Telephone (toll 

free): 1–877–433–7827. FAX: (301) 470–

1244. If you use a telecommunications 

device for the deaf (TDD), you may call 

(toll free): 1–877–576–7734. 

You may also contact ED Pubs at its 

Web site: http://www.ed.gov/pubs/ 

edpubs.html or you may contact ED 

Pubs at its e-mail address: 

edpubs@inet.ed.gov. 

If you request an application from ED 

Pubs, be sure to identify this 

competition as follows: CFDA number 

84.349A. 

Individuals with disabilities may 

obtain a copy of the application package 

in an alternative format (e.g., Braille, 

large print, audiotape, or computer 

diskette) by contacting the program 

contact person listed in section VII. FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT of this 

notice. However, the Department is not 

able to reproduce in an alternative 

format the standard forms included in 

the application package. 

2. Content and Form of Application 

Submission: Requirements concerning 

the content of the application, together 

with the forms you must submit, are in 

the application package for this 

competition. 

Page Limits: You must include in Part 

I of the application an Abstract briefly 

describing your proposed project. You 

must limit the Abstract to one (1) page. 

The application narrative for this 

program (Part III of the application) is 

where you, the applicant, address the 

selection criteria that reviewers use to 

evaluate your application. You must 

limit Part III of the application to the 

equivalent of no more than 30 typed 

pages. Part IV of the application is 

where you, the applicant, provide a 

budget narrative that reviewers use to 

evaluate your application. You must 

limit the budget narrative in Part IV of 

the application to the equivalent of no 

more than 5 typed pages. Part V of the 

application is where you, the applicant, 

include the Appendices described later 

in this section, including any response 

to the Competitive Preference PriorityScientifically Based Evaluation 

Methods. You must limit any response 

to the Competitive Preference Priority to 

no more than 3 typed pages. 

For all page limits, use the following 

standards: 

• A ‘‘page’’ is 8.5′′ x 11′′, on one side 

only, with 1′′ margins at the top, bottom, 

and both sides. 

• Double space (no more than three 

lines per vertical inch) all text in the 

application and budget narratives, 

including titles, headings, footnotes, 

quotations, references, and captions. 

Text in tables, charts, or graphs, and the 

limited Appendices, may be single 

spaced. 

• Use a font that is either 12-point or 

larger or no smaller than 10 pitch 

(characters per inch). You may use other 

point fonts for any tables, charts, graphs, 

and the limited Appendices, but those 

tables, charts, graphs and limited 

Appendices should be in a font size that 

is easily readable by the reviewers of 

your application. 

• Any tables, charts, or graphs are 

included in the overall narrative page 

limit. The limited Appendices, 

including the partnership agreement 

required as a group agreement under 34 

CFR 75.128, and any Competitive 

Preference Priority response, are not 

part of the overall narrative page limits. 

• Appendices are limited to the 

following: Absolute Priority Form 

(required); partnership agreement 

(required); any response to the 

Competitive Preference Priority; and 

any position descriptions (and resumes 

or curriculum vitae if available) of key 

personnel (including key contract 

personnel and consultants). 

Other application materials are 

limited to the specific materials 

indicated in the application package, 

and may not include any video or other 

non-print materials. 

Our reviewers will not read any pages 

of your application that—

• Exceed the page limits if you apply 

these standards; or 

• Exceed the equivalent of the page 

limits if you apply other standards. 

3. Submission Dates and Times. 

Applications Available: February 20, 

2007. 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 34 / Wednesday, February 21, 2007 / Notices 7865 

Deadline for Transmittal of 

Applications: April 20, 2007. 

Applications for grants under this 

competition must be submitted 

electronically using the Grants.gov 

Apply site (Grants.gov). For information 

(including dates and times) about how 

to submit your application 

electronically, or by mail or hand 

delivery if you qualify for an exception 

to the electronic submission 

requirement, please refer to section IV. 

6. Other Submission Requirements in 

this notice. 

We do not consider an application 

that does not comply with the deadline 

requirements. 

Individuals with disabilities who 

need an accommodation or auxiliary aid 

in connection with the application 

process should contact the person listed 

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

Deadline for Intergovernmental 

Review: June 19, 2007. 

4. Intergovernmental Review: This 

program is subject to Executive Order 

12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR 

part 79. Information about 

Intergovernmental Review of Federal 

Programs under Executive Order 12372 

is in the application package for this 

competition. 

5. Funding Restrictions: (a) Indirect 

Costs. For purposes of indirect cost 

charges, the Secretary considers all 

ECEPD program grants to be 

‘‘educational training grants’’ within the 

meaning of section 75.562(a) of EDGAR. 

Consistent with 34 CFR 75.562, the 

indirect cost rate for any recipient other 

than a State agency or agency of local 

government (such as an LEA or a 

federally recognized Indian tribal 

government) is limited to a maximum of 

eight percent, or the amount of the 

recipient’s actual indirect costs 

permitted by its negotiated indirect cost 

rate agreement, whichever is less. This 

indirect cost limit applies to cost-type 

contracts only if those contracts are for 

educational training as defined in 34 

CFR 75.562. Further information about 

indirect cost rates is in the application 

package for this competition. 

(b) Pre-award Costs. For FY 2007 the 

Secretary approves, under sections 

75.263 and 74.25(e)(1) of Education 

Department General Administrative 

Regulations, pre-award costs incurred 

by recipients of ECEPD grants more than 

90 calendar days before the grant award. 

Specifically, the Secretary approves 

necessary and reasonable pre-award 

costs incurred by grant recipients for up 

to 90 days before the application 

deadline date. These pre-award costs 

must be related to the needs assessment 

that applicants conduct under section 

2151(e)(3)(B)(iii) of the ESEA before 

submitting their applications to 

determine the most critical professional 

development needs of the early 

childhood educators to be served by the 

project and in the broader community. 

Applicants incur any pre-award costs 

at their own risk. The Secretary is under 

no obligation to reimburse these costs if 

for any reason the applicant does not 

receive an award or if the award is less 

than anticipated and inadequate to 

cover these costs. 

We reference additional regulations 

outlining funding restrictions in the 

Applicable Regulations section of this 

notice. 

6. Other Submission Requirements: 

Applications for grants under this 

competition must be submitted 

electronically unless you qualify for an 

exception to this requirement in 

accordance with the instructions in this 

section. 

a. Electronic Submission of 

Applications. 

Applications for grants under the 

ECEPD program, CFDA 84.349A must be 

submitted electronically using the 

Governmentwide Grants.gov Apply site 

at: http://www.grants.gov. Through this 

site, you will be able to download a 

copy of the application package, 

complete it offline, and then upload and 

submit your application. You may not email an electronic copy of a grant 

application to us. 

We will reject your application if you 

submit it in paper format unless, as 

described elsewhere in this section, you 

qualify for one of the exceptions to the 

electronic submission requirement and 

submit, no later than two weeks before 

the application deadline date, a written 

statement to the Department that you 

qualify for one of these exceptions. 

Further information regarding 

calculation of the date that is two weeks 

before the application deadline date is 

provided later in this section under 

Exception to Electronic Submission 

Requirement. 

You may access the electronic grant 

application for the ECEPD program at: 

http://www.grants.gov. You must search 

for the downloadable application 

package for this program by the CFDA 

number. Do not include the CFDA 

number’s alpha suffix in your search 

(e.g., search for 84.349 not 84.349A). 

Please note the following: 

• When you enter the Grants.gov site, 

you will find information about 

submitting an application electronically 

through the site, as well as the hours of 

operation. 

• Applications received by Grants.gov 

are date and time stamped. Your 

application must be fully uploaded and 

submitted, and must be date and time 

stamped by the Grants.gov system no 

later than 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC 

time, on the application deadline date. 

Except as otherwise noted in this 

section, we will not consider your 

application if it is date and time 

stamped by the Grants.gov system later 

than 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, on 

the application deadline date. When we 

retrieve your application from 

Grants.gov, we will notify you if we are 

rejecting your application because it 

was date and time stamped by the 

Grants.gov system after 4:30 p.m., 

Washington, DC time, on the 

application deadline date. 

• The amount of time it can take to 

upload an application will vary 

depending on a variety of factors 

including the size of the application and 

the speed of your Internet connection. 

Therefore, we strongly recommend that 

you do not wait until the application 

deadline date to begin the submission 

process through Grants.gov. 

• You should review and follow the 

Education Submission Procedures for 

submitting an application through 

Grants.gov that are included in the 

application package for this competition 

to ensure that you submit your 

application in a timely manner to the 

Grants.gov system. You can also find the 

Education Submission Procedures 

pertaining to Grants.gov at 

http://e-Grants.ed.gov/help/ 

GrantsgovSubmissionProcedures.pdf. 

• To submit your application via 

Grants.gov, you must complete all of the 

steps in the Grants.gov registration 

process see http://www.Grants.gov/ 

applicants/get_registered.jsp). These 

steps include (1) registering your 

organization, a multi-part process that 

includes registration with the Central 

Contractor Registry (CCR); (2) registering 

yourself as an Authorized Organization 

Representative (AOR); and (3) getting 

authorized as an AOR by your 

organization. Details on these steps are 

outlined in the Grants.gov 3-Step 

Registration Guide (see http:// 

www.Grants.gov/section 910/ 

Grants.govRegistrationBrochure.pdf). 

You also must provide on your 

application the same D-U-N-S Number 

used with this registration. Please note 

that the registration process may take 

five or more business days to complete, 

and you must have completed all 

registration steps to allow you to submit 

successfully an application via 

Grants.gov. In addition you will need to 

update your CCR registration on an 

annual basis. This may take three or 

more business days to complete. 

• You will not receive additional 

point value because you submit your 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES
7866 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 34 / Wednesday, February 21, 2007 / Notices 

application in electronic format, nor 

will we penalize you if you qualify for 

an exception to the electronic 

submission requirement, as described 

elsewhere in this section, and submit 

your application in paper format. 

• You must submit all documents 

electronically, including all information 

you typically provide on the following 

forms: Application for Federal 

Assistance (SF 424), the Department of 

Education Supplemental Information for 

SF 424, Budget Information—NonConstruction Programs (ED 524), and all 

necessary assurances and certifications. 

Please note that two of these forms-the 

SF 424 and the Department of Education 

Supplemental Information for SF 424- 

have replaced the ED 424 (Application 

for Federal Education Assistance). 

• You must attach any narrative 

sections of your application as files in 

a .DOC (document), .RTF (rich text), or 

.PDF (Portable Document) format. If you 

upload a file type other than the three 

file types specified in this paragraph or 

submit a password-protected file, we 

will not review that material. 

• Your electronic application must 

comply with any page-limit 

requirements described in this notice. 

• After you electronically submit 

your application, you will receive from 

Grants.gov an automatic notification of 

receipt that contains a Grants.gov 

tracking number. (This notification 

indicates receipt by Grants.gov only, not 

receipt by the Department.) The 

Department then will retrieve your 

application from Grants.gov and send a 

second notification to you by e-mail. 

This second notification indicates that 

the Department has received your 

application and has assigned your 

application a PR/Award number (an EDspecified identifying number unique to 

your application). 

• We may request that you provide us 

original signatures on forms at a later 

date. 

Application Deadline Date Extension 

in Case of Technical Issues with the 

Grants.gov System: If you are 

experiencing problems submitting your 

application through Grants.gov, please 

contact the Grants.gov Support Desk at 

1–800–518–4726. You must obtain a 

Grants.gov Support Desk Case Number 

and must keep a record of it. 

If you are prevented from 

electronically submitting your 

application on the application deadline 

date because of technical problems with 

the Grants.gov system, we will grant you 

an extension until 4:30 p.m., 

Washington, DC time, the following 

business day to enable you to transmit 

your application electronically or by 

hand delivery. You also may mail your 

application by following the mailing 

instructions as described elsewhere in 

this notice. 

If you submit an application after 4:30 

p.m., Washington, DC time, on the 

application deadline date, please 

contact the person listed elsewhere in 

this notice under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT and provide an 

explanation of the technical problem 

you experienced with Grants.gov, along 

with the Grants.gov Support Desk Case 

Number. We will accept your 

application if we can confirm that a 

technical problem occurred with the 

Grants.gov system and that that problem 

affected your ability to submit your 

application by 4:30 p.m., Washington, 

DC time, on the application deadline 

date. The Department will contact you 

after a determination is made on 

whether your application will be 

accepted. 

Note: The extensions to which we refer in 

this section apply only to the unavailability 

of, or technical problems with, the Grants.gov 

system. We will not grant you an extension 

if you failed to fully register to submit your 

application to Grants.gov before the 

application deadline date and time or if the 

technical problem you experienced is 

unrelated to the Grants.gov system. 

Exception to Electronic Submission 

Requirement: You qualify for an 

exception to the electronic submission 

requirement, and may submit your 

application in paper format, if you are 

unable to submit an application through 

the Grants.gov system because—

• You do not have access to the 

Internet; or 

• You do not have the capacity to 

upload large documents to the 

Grants.gov system; and 

• No later than two weeks before the 

application deadline date (14 calendar 

days or, if the fourteenth calendar day 

before the application deadline date 

falls on a Federal holiday, the next 

business day following the Federal 

holiday), you mail or fax a written 

statement to the Department, explaining 

which of the two grounds for an 

exception prevent you from using the 

Internet to submit your application. 

If you mail your written statement to 

the Department, it must be postmarked 

no later than two weeks before the 

application deadline date. If you fax 

your written statement to the 

Department, we must receive the faxed 

statement no later than two weeks 

before the application deadline date. 

Address and mail or fax your 

statement to: Rosemary V. Fennell, U.S. 

Department of Education, 400 Maryland 

Avenue, SW., room 3C122, Washington, 

DC 20202–6132. FAX: (202) 260–7764. 

Your paper application must be 

submitted in accordance with the mail 

or hand delivery instructions described 

in this notice. 

b. Submission of Paper Applications 

by Mail. 

If you qualify for an exception to the 

electronic submission requirement, you 

may mail (through the U.S. Postal 

Service or a commercial carrier) your 

application to the Department. You 

must mail the original and two copies 

of your application, on or before the 

application deadline date, to the 

Department at the applicable following 

address: 

By mail through the U.S. Postal 

Service: U.S. Department of Education, 

Application Control Center, Attention: 

CFDA Number 84.349A, 400 Maryland 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20202–

4260 or 

By mail through a commercial carrier: 

U.S. Department of Education, 

Application Control Center—Stop 4260, 

Attention: CFDA Number 84.349A, 7100 

Old Landover Road, Landover, MD 

20785–1506. 

Regardless of which address you use, 

you must show proof of mailing 

consisting of one of the following: 

(1) A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service 

postmark. 

(2) A legible mail receipt with the 

date of mailing stamped by the U.S. 

Postal Service. 

(3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or 

receipt from a commercial carrier. 

(4) Any other proof of mailing 

acceptable to the Secretary of the U.S. 

Department of Education. 

If you mail your application through 

the U.S. Postal Service, we do not 

accept either of the following as proof 

of mailing: 

(1) A private metered postmark. 

(2) A mail receipt that is not dated by 

the U.S. Postal Service. 

If your application is postmarked after 

the application deadline date, we will 

not consider your application. 

Note: The U.S. Postal Service does not 

uniformly provide a dated postmark. Before 

relying on this method, you should check 

with your local post office. 

c. Submission of Paper Applications 

by Hand Delivery. 

If you qualify for an exception to the 

electronic submission requirement, you 

(or a courier service) may deliver your 

paper application to the Department by 

hand. You must deliver the original and 

two copies of your application by hand, 

on or before the application deadline 

date, to the Department at the following 

address: U.S. Department of Education, 

Application Control Center, Attention: 

CFDA Number 84.349A, 550 12th Street, 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 34 / Wednesday, February 21, 2007 / Notices 7867 

SW., Room 7041, Potomac Center Plaza, 

Washington, DC 20202–4260. 

The Application Control Center accepts 

hand deliveries daily between 8 a.m. 

and 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, 

except Saturdays, Sundays and Federal 

holidays. 

Note for Mail or Hand Delivery of Paper 

Applications: If you mail or hand deliver 

your application to the Department—

(1) You must indicate on the envelope 

and—if not provided by the Department—in 

Item 11 of the SF 424 the CFDA number, 

including the suffix letter, if any, of the 

competition under which you are submitting 

your application; and 

(2) The Application Control Center will 

mail to you a notification of receipt of your 

grant application. If you do not receive this 

notification within 15 business days from the 

application deadline date, you should call 

the U.S. Department of Education 

Application Control Center at (202) 245–

6288. 

V. Application Review Information 

1. Selection Criteria: The selection 

criteria for this competition are from 

section 75.210 of EDGAR. The 

maximum score for all the selection 

criteria is 100 points. The maximum 

score for each criterion is indicated in 

parentheses. Each criterion also 

includes the factors that the reviewers 

will consider in determining how well 

an application meets the criterion. The 

selection criteria are as follows: 

(a) Need for project (up to 10 points). 

(1) The Secretary considers the need 

for the proposed project. 

(2) In determining the need for the 

proposed project, the Secretary 

considers the extent to which the 

proposed project will focus on serving 

or otherwise addressing the needs of 

disadvantaged individuals. 

(b) Significance (up to 10 points). The 

Secretary considers the significance of 

the proposed project. In determining the 

significance of the proposed project, the 

Secretary considers the following 

factors: 

(i) The importance or magnitude of 

the results or outcomes likely to be 

attained by the proposed project, 

especially improvements in teaching 

and student achievement. 

(ii) The extent to which the proposed 

project is likely to build local capacity 

to provide, improve, or expand services 

that address the needs of the target 

population. 

(c) Quality of the project design (up to 

20 points). The Secretary considers the 

quality of the design of the proposed 

project. In determining the quality of the 

design of the proposed project, the 

Secretary considers the following 

factors: 

(i) The extent to which the proposed 

activities constitute a coherent, 

sustained program of training in the 

field. 

(ii) The extent to which the design of 

the proposed project reflects up-to-date 

knowledge from research and effective 

practice. 

(d) Quality of project services (up to 

10 points). The Secretary considers the 

quality of the services to be provided by 

the proposed project. In determining the 

quality of the services to be provided by 

the proposed project, the Secretary 

considers the quality and sufficiency of 

strategies for ensuring equal access and 

treatment for eligible project 

participants who are members of groups 

that have traditionally been 

underrepresented based on race, color, 

national origin, gender, age, or 

disability. In addition, the Secretary 

considers the following factors: 

(i) The extent to which the services to 

be provided by the proposed project are 

appropriate to the needs of the intended 

recipients or beneficiaries of those 

services. 

(ii) The extent to which the training 

or professional development services to 

be provided by the proposed project are 

of sufficient quality, intensity, and 

duration to lead to improvements in 

practice among the recipients of those 

services. 

(e) Quality of project personnel (up to 

10 points). The Secretary considers the 

quality of the personnel who will carry 

out the proposed project. In determining 

the quality of project personnel, the 

Secretary considers the extent to which 

the applicant encourages applications 

for employment from persons who are 

members of groups that have been 

traditionally underrepresented based on 

race, color, national origin, gender, age, 

or disability. In addition, the Secretary 

considers the following factors: 

(i) The qualifications, including 

relevant training and experience, of key 

project personnel. 

(ii) The qualifications, including 

relevant training and experience, of 

project consultants or subcontractors. 

(f) Quality of the management plan 

(up to 10 points). The Secretary 

considers the quality of the management 

plan for the proposed project. In 

determining the quality of the 

management plan for the proposed 

project, the Secretary considers the 

following factors: 

(i) The adequacy of the management 

plan to achieve the objectives of the 

proposed project on time and within 

budget, including clearly defined 

responsibilities, timelines, and 

milestones for accomplishing project 

tasks. 

(ii) The extent to which the time 

commitments of the project director and 

principal investigator and other key 

project personnel are appropriate and 

adequate to meet the objectives of the 

proposed project. 

(g) Quality of the project evaluation 

(up to 25 points). The Secretary 

considers the quality of the evaluation 

to be conducted of the proposed project. 

In determining the quality of the 

evaluation, the Secretary considers the 

following factors: 

(i) The extent to which the methods 

of evaluation are thorough, feasible, and 

appropriate to the goals, objectives, and 

outcomes of the proposed project. 

(ii) The extent to which the methods 

of evaluation will provide performance 

feedback and permit periodic 

assessment of progress toward achieving 

intended outcomes. 

(h) Adequacy of Resources (up to 5 

points). The Secretary considers the 

adequacy of resources for the proposed 

project. In determining the adequacy of 

resources for the proposed project, the 

Secretary considers the following 

factors: 

(i) The extent to which the costs are 

reasonable in relation to the objectives, 

design, and potential significance of the 

proposed project. 

(ii) The potential for continued 

support of the project after Federal 

funding ends, including, as appropriate, 

the demonstrated commitment of 

appropriate entities to such support. 

2. Review and Selection Process: An 

additional factor we consider in 

selecting an application for an award is 

geographical distribution (section 

2151(e)(4)(B) of the ESEA). 

VI. Award Administration Information 

1. Award Notices: If your application 

is successful, we notify your U.S. 

Representative and U.S. Senators and 

send you a Grant Award Notice (GAN). 

We may also notify you informally. 

If your application is not evaluated or 

not selected for funding, we notify you. 

2. Administrative and National Policy 

Requirements: We identify 

administrative and national policy 

requirements in the application package 

and reference these and other 

requirements in the Applicable 

Regulations section of this notice. 

We reference the regulations outlining 

the terms and conditions of an award in 

the Applicable Regulations section of 

this notice and include these and other 

specific conditions in the GAN. The 

GAN also incorporates your approved 

application as part of your binding 

commitments under the grant. 

3. Reporting: At the end of your 

project period, you must submit a final 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES
7868 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 34 / Wednesday, February 21, 2007 / Notices 

performance report, including financial 

information, as directed by the 

Secretary. If you receive a multi-year 

award, you must submit an annual 

performance report that provides the 

most current performance and financial 

expenditure information as specified by 

the Secretary in 34 CFR 75.118. For 

specific requirements on grantee 

reporting, please go to: http:// 

www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/ 

appforms/appforms.html. 

4. Performance Measures: For FY 

2007, grants under the ECEPD program 

will be governed by the achievement 

indicators that the Secretary published 

in the Federal Register on March 31, 

2003 (68 FR 15646). These achievement 

indicators are included in the 

application package. 

In addition, under the Government 

Performance and Results Act of 1993 

(GPRA), the Secretary has established 

the following measures for evaluating 

the overall effectiveness of the ECEPD 

program, which are coordinated with 

the program’s achievement indicators 

and are included in the application 

package: (1) The ECEPD teacher’s 

average score on the Early Language and 

Literacy Classroom Observation 

(ELLCO); and (2) the percentage of 

children who demonstrate improved 

readiness for school in the areas of early 

language (as measured by the Peabody 

Picture Vocabulary Test–III (PPVT–III), 

Receptive) and early literacy (as 

measured by the PALS Pre-K, Upper 

Case Alphabet Knowledge subtask). The 

coordination of these achievement 

indicators and performance measures is 

designed to improve program 

management, and to help Congress, the 

Department, the Office of Management 

and Budget, and others review a 

program’s progress toward its goals. All 

grantees must document participant 

outcomes on these performance 

measures in the annual performance 

report referenced in section VI. 3. of this 

notice. The applicant’s evaluation 

design provided in response to the 

selection criterion for Quality of project 

evaluation in section V. 1. of this notice 

should include the use of these 

assessment tools, at a minimum. 

VII. Agency Contact 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Rosemary Fennell, U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., 

room 3C–122, Washington, DC 20202–

6132. Telephone: (202) 260–0792, or by 

e-mail: eceprofdev@ed.gov. 

If you use a telecommunications 

device for the deaf (TDD), you may call 

the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1–

800–877–8339. 

Individuals with disabilities may 

obtain this document in an alternative 

format (e.g., Braille, large print, 

audiotape, or computer diskette) on 

request to the program contact person 

listed in this section. 

VIII. Other Information 

Electronic Access to This Document: 

You may view this document, as well as 

all other documents of this Department 

published in the Federal Register, in 

text or Adobe Portable Document 

Format (PDF) on the Internet at the 

following site: http://www.ed.gov/news/ 

fedregister. 

To use PDF you must have Adobe 

Acrobat Reader, which is available free 

at this site. If you have questions about 

using PDF, call the U.S. Government 

Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1–

888–293–6498; or in the Washington, 

DC, area at (202) 512–1530. 

Note: The official version of this document 

is the document published in the Federal 

Register. Free Internet access to the official 

edition of the Federal Register and the Code 

of Federal Regulations is available on GPO 

Access at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/ 

index.html. 

Dated: February 15, 2007. 

Raymond Simon, 

Deputy Secretary for Education. 

[FR Doc. E7–2964 Filed 2–20–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

National Committee on Foreign 

Medical Education and Accreditation; 

Meeting 

AGENCY: National Committee on Foreign 

Medical Education and Accreditation, 

Department of Education. 

What Is the Purpose of This Notice? 

The purpose of this notice is to 

announce the upcoming meeting of the 

National Committee on Foreign Medical 

Education and Accreditation. Parts of 

this meeting will be open to the public, 

and the public is invited to attend those 

portions. 

When and Where Will the Meeting 

Take Place? 

We will hold the public meeting on 

March 28, 2007 from 8 a.m. until 

approximately 5 p.m. in the Chesapeake 

Room at The Watergate Hotel, 2650 

Virginia Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 

20037. You may call the hotel at 1–800–

289–1555; e-mail: http:// 

www.thewatergatehotel.com to inquire 

about room accommodations. 

What Assistance Will Be Provided to 

Individuals With Disabilities? 

The meeting site is accessible to 

individuals with disabilities. If you will 

need an auxiliary aid or service to 

participate in the meeting (e.g., 

interpreting service, assistive listening 

device, or materials in an alternate 

format) notify the contact person listed 

in this notice at least two weeks before 

the scheduled meeting date. Although 

we will attempt to meet a request 

received after that date, we may not be 

able to make available the requested 

auxiliary aid or service because of 

insufficient time to arrange it. 

Who Is the Contact Person for the 

Meeting? 

Please contact Ms. Francesca ParisAlbertson, the Executive Director of the 

National Committee on Foreign Medical 

Education and Accreditation, if you 

have questions about the meeting. You 

may contact her at the U.S. Department 

of Education, room 7110, 1990 K St. 

NW., Washington, DC 20006, telephone: 

(202) 219–7009, fax: (202) 219–7008, email: Francesca.Paris-Albertson@ed.gov. 

Individuals who use a 

telecommunications device for the deaf 

(TDD) may call the Federal Information 

Relay Service at 1–800–877–8339. 

What Are the Functions of the National 

Committee? 

The National Committee on Foreign 

Medical Education and Accreditation 

was established by the Secretary of 

Education under section 102 of the 

Higher Education Act of 1965, as 

amended. The Committee’s 

responsibilities are to: 

• Evaluate the standards of 

accreditation applied to applicant 

foreign medical schools; and 

• Determine the comparability of 

those standards to standards for 

accreditation applied to United States 

medical schools. 

What Items Will Be on the Agenda for 

Discussion at the Meeting? 

The National Committee on Foreign 

Medical Education and Accreditation 

will review the standards of 

accreditation applied to medical schools 

by several foreign countries to 

determine whether those standards are 

comparable to the standards of 

accreditation applied to medical schools 

in the United States. Discussions of the 

standards of accreditation will be held 

in sessions open to the public. 

Discussions that focus on specific 

determinations of comparability are 

closed to the public in order that each 

country may be properly notified of the 

decision. The countries scheduled to be 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES